Stealthy aircraft are defensive (keep sensors mute) and defending fighters can’t see s##t until they actually see the aircraft (via IR or via classic Human Optical Search, Track & Identification System (=pair of eyes)).

This is why the tactics employed by stealth aircraft are just as important as the signature and weapons capability. If you can see your opponent through passive or offboard sensors while he can’t see you, you can maneuver yourself to stay out of his detection envelope while putting him as deep into your weapons’ no escape zone as possible before revealing your presence. This is also why I hate the whole Gen 3, 4, 4.5 vs. Gen 5 aircraft comparisons. As long as the Stealthy pilot sticks with his training, the non-stealth aircraft will never know the stealthy one is out there until his RWR goes nuts.

The thing that me is the constant cry that its a French company from certain American circles.

Its a European company with the ownership shared accross several states.

The accusation of risk to American technology is comical as well, the US is more then happy to sell advanced weapons technology to all the European nations owning EADS including France who operate the Hawkeye. What about the Aegis systems sold to Spain? Its a tanker aircraft we are talking about not a stealth bomber!

Also a great many KC135 operate with engines containing French parts, not once has anything been held back by France in relation to these engines.

Finally the way America talks about France saddens me, whilst over the years neither country has always seen eye to eye France is a NATO Ally that America owes not only its independence but the very nature of its democracy.

The United States of Hypocrisy. You gotta laugh at it, otherwise you’ll cry. This is what I meant when I said the relatively stupid masses that make up the population here. 9 out of 10 Americans don’t know anything about this issue, but they’re all too quick to hysterics when their elected ‘leaders’ start in with the xenophobia.

Mexico?

Edit. Nope, they were used in civil wars and revolutions there.

And for just a little more (compared to the quoted price of one such refining plant), you can add currently-in-use stack scrubbers/purifiers which remove the CO2 from the exhaust and absorb it into a solid material, rendering the environmental issue technically* irrelevant.

Of course, those Greenies and their pet media and Congresscritters will ignore this and trumpet these plants as “The End Of The World”.

*As Greenies hate technology, they will not even know this, but it will still be political fodder… even though they will be spinning lies to support their cause.

99% of all pollution can be prevented with a little more technology actually being purchased & installed, but between bean-counters who refuse to spend on anything not required (by law or production necessity) and pollies/greenies who block such solutions because it will take away the “crisis issue” they get so much power from, we have the mess we are in now.

I gotta agree with you there. Here in the Dallas area, a power company’s proposal to built several new, state of the art coal power plants was killed due to environmental concerns. never mind the fact that those plants would have replaced old, less efficient, more polluting coal power plants on about a 3 old to 1 new basis.

Wow…….I was completely and utterly wrong. I’ll admit it.

This is a big surprise to me, but I suppose if at the end of the day, they figured they needed the capabilities of the A330 then who knows…I guess it is the better choice. Seeing as I might end up flying a tanker within the next year I’ve been paying attention to this whole ordeal and while I don’t know what I’ll be flying yet, there’s always the possibility of them putting me in a tanker so at the very least its nice to have something similar to closure on this although I’m sure the appeals process will be quite ugly.

I’m just surprised because of the size difference. If this is a KC-10 replacement, then I can understand ordering a really large jet, but the KC-135 is so much smaller than the A330 that it just doesn’t seem to make much sense to me. I’m also blown away by the fact that the A330 can apparently take-off fully loaded on a 7,000 foot runway……or at least that’s what EADS claims. How is this possible though? It’s so huge!

I wonder if they are planning on replacing the KC-10 with the KC-45 eventually anyways, and more orders are in the pipes years down the road??

I guess having a fleet of one tanker type would be a bit easier on logistics among other things….

Maybe with this and the KC-Y, the USAF is looking to increase the baseline tanker with a 777 based tanker similarly bumping up the capacity with regards to the KC-10.

As for the Super Hornet itself its currently the best “STRIKER” flying. Remember, the whole point of the Super Hornet was a stop gap between the retirement of the F-111’s and the arrival of the F-35’s. A role its well suited too……………;)

The capabilities shown by the F-15K or SG would beg to differ on the “STRIKER” part of your statement, but you are correct about it being the best stopgap measure. Especially the ability to give them/sell them at a reduced price to the USN when they are no longer needed. A couple dozen lightly used (non-carrier landed or launched) Superbugs would be a nice thing to have in 10-15 years when the first batches start to show their age.

Why ? Because the AESA has most likely better range ? The Gripen still has the superior agility, the less than 1/10th rcs, and more or less the same weapons. The AESA advantage is seriously crippled by the short range of missiles and the large RCS of the F-16. But either way the Gripen to India would also use a AESA so eh. No, I don’t see the F-16 as “pwn”-ing the gripen a whole lot.

What weapon does the Gripen have in service that outranges the Viper’s? They both use AMRAAM as their primary BVR weapon, so the one who locks up and fires first has the advantage. That’s all radar capability related and the APG-80 has the advantage there as it is far more mature than any potential AESA for Gripen. Does the Gripen have any A-G weaponry that the F-16 doesn’t have?

I agree the near parity does not equal “pwn-ing”.

And before anyone gets into Meteor as the future weapon on the Gripen, how does that compare to the upcoming D model AMRAAM (not saying India would get either of these with their aircraft, but for arguments sake we’ll include them) range and performance-wise? The D model will be pushing 100NM (160KM) range.